nikon 85mm F1.8 or tamron 28-75 F2.8
- Thread starter legacyex
- Start date
It really depends on your style and the type of shoot ur taking.
Answer lies in u.
However, people can advise u and u make the final decision.
For me, i would go for the 85mm anyway time since u mention portrait.
The Bokeh for 85mm would be much more creamy.
The Tamron 28-75mm can be also used as a portrait lens even a 70-200mm.
The 28-75mm may also be used other than portrait shoots.
Do u need a zoom range?
If, u r a DX user losing that slightly wide angle is it ok for u?
Do you have a budget?
Actually there are lots of reviews if u do a search...
Just my views on it...
Good luck.:thumbsup:
Answer lies in u.
However, people can advise u and u make the final decision.
For me, i would go for the 85mm anyway time since u mention portrait.
The Bokeh for 85mm would be much more creamy.
The Tamron 28-75mm can be also used as a portrait lens even a 70-200mm.
The 28-75mm may also be used other than portrait shoots.
Do u need a zoom range?
If, u r a DX user losing that slightly wide angle is it ok for u?
Do you have a budget?
Actually there are lots of reviews if u do a search...
Just my views on it...
Good luck.:thumbsup:
Last edited:
actually how to rate this?
it involves the user how to rate its performance?
Different people has different performance which is the piece of art work/ photo produced isn't it? or am i reading it in a wrong way? What is a good picture?
links from the first page of goolgle if you wern't so lazy to google it yourself.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=721239
http://www.flickr.com/groups/tamron2875mm/discuss/72157612016141137/
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=721239
http://www.flickr.com/groups/tamron2875mm/discuss/72157612016141137/
for me, I would shoot high key creamy bokeh for portraits. but the problem is the frequent changing of lens to and from 35mm prime.
1. Slightly more shallow DOF - 85mm
2. Limited space (Eg. Indoors) - Tamron
3. Versatility and other uses - Tamron
4. Better subject isolation for waist to head shots - 85mm
5. Close focus for some detail shots - Tamron
6. Slightly faster lens in dim lighting - 85mm
Here is one done with a Tamron 28-75 @f2.8
On the other spectrum. This one done by a 85/2 @f2
The blurred bkgnd is not an absolute. Factors like bkgnd distance and focus distance play a big part as well.
I've never found one lens or the other lacking in this area.
2. Limited space (Eg. Indoors) - Tamron
3. Versatility and other uses - Tamron
4. Better subject isolation for waist to head shots - 85mm
5. Close focus for some detail shots - Tamron
6. Slightly faster lens in dim lighting - 85mm
Here is one done with a Tamron 28-75 @f2.8
On the other spectrum. This one done by a 85/2 @f2
The blurred bkgnd is not an absolute. Factors like bkgnd distance and focus distance play a big part as well.
I've never found one lens or the other lacking in this area.
sorry maybe i should ask in terms of value for money
:sweat: thanks much :embrass:
thanks1. Slightly more shallow DOF - 85mm
2. Limited space (Eg. Indoors) - Tamron
3. Versatility and other uses - Tamron
4. Better subject isolation for waist to head shots - 85mm
5. Close focus for some detail shots - Tamron
6. Slightly faster lens in dim lighting - 85mm
Here is one done with a Tamron 28-75 @f2.8
On the other spectrum. This one done by a 85/2 @f2
The blurred bkgnd is not an absolute. Factors like bkgnd distance and focus distance play a big part as well.
I've never found one lens or the other lacking in this area.
Come on pal.. there's resoruces plenty on the WWW
Embrace its beauty pls.. Use the Search Engines available
That said. Longer focal length and wider aperture are much preferred for portraiture work..
sorry maybe i should ask in terms of value for money
:sweat: thanks much :embrass:
thanks
In all honesty, I think both lenses are great value for money. Doesn't matter if you're taking high key or low key portraits, both will be able to do so.
As a walkaround lens with the additional capability to shoot portraits with nice 'bokeh' (subjective), the 28-75 in my opinion is one of the best lenses in it's price range.
On the other hand, if you're looking for a good alternative for the 85 1.4 and you're on a budget, then the 85 1.8 is great value for money. Though limiting in functionality, it still makes for a great portrait lens or short tele lens in low light settings.
From what I gather, the 28-75 would be more suited to you since you find changing lenses a hassle.
isn't clubsnap a form of search/ resource too and its WWW as well?Come on pal.. there's resoruces plenty on the WWW
Embrace its beauty pls.. Use the Search Engines available
That said. Longer focal length and wider aperture are much preferred for portraiture work..
I see.. thanks for sharing.
It is, but the question is, have your searched? Or is it just ask?
Don't have an issue with you asking, just responding to that comment specifically about it being a search/resource, because very often people ask questions without running a search first.
With regards to your question, they are totally different lenses, which basically means the decision should come down to you as the photographer.
Both lenses are great for portraits ... just like the 50 prime and premium high speed 80200 zoom you asked about in another thread. The 85 may have a slight edge for portrait specific photography based on IQ, focus speed and bokeh at the cost of convenience and versatility as pointed out by others.
'Value for money' can only be defined by the criteria and parameters you set based on your needs and shooting preferences/style.
What I would suggest to anyone with your dilemma is borrowing or renting the lenses you're most interested in and finding out, first hand, which suits your needs better/which you prefer. Different photographers will have different requirements/preferences.
'Value for money' can only be defined by the criteria and parameters you set based on your needs and shooting preferences/style.
What I would suggest to anyone with your dilemma is borrowing or renting the lenses you're most interested in and finding out, first hand, which suits your needs better/which you prefer. Different photographers will have different requirements/preferences.
Both lenses are great for portraits ... just like the 50 prime and premium high speed 80200 zoom you asked about in another thread. The 85 may have a slight edge for portrait specific photography based on IQ, focus speed and bokeh at the cost of convenience and versatility as pointed out by others.
'Value for money' can only be defined by the criteria and parameters you set based on your needs and shooting preferences/style.
What I would suggest to anyone with your dilemma is borrowing or renting the lenses you're most interested in and finding out, first hand, which suits your needs better/which you prefer. Different photographers will have different requirements/preferences.
Thanks. I will head down to the shop this week.
Similar threads
